Best Upside...OAD{talent} vs 3-4 AD {experience}?

[TangoBlue]

First of all, let me get out of the way the fact that I am a UK fan, and surprisingly enough I know all about the corruption, cheating, buying the refs, Calipari will get UK on probation etc. statements....so please spare me that in your reply! Beating a ... I know ...and it will be said....but....I'm asking for your honest opinion.

Which type of team;
1. a team of great talent and little experience such as {for example only} a OAD UK or Mich. Fab Five..............OR

2. a Jr-Senior laden team with lots of experience but maybe not as much top notch talent such as {for example only}an Iowa or an Oregon, would have more upside to their game by the end of the year?

I think that most of the time and during most of the season experience counts for a lot, and a team could overcome their lack of GREAT talent. However due to their experience, I feel that they are probably using their talent as effectively as possible during the early part of the season, and smoothing out the rough edges still remaining would be what you would notice at the end of the season...i.e. "A WELL OILED MACHINE" Many well-oiled machines have won the NCAA tourney.


I think that a young super talented team has a long WAY to go to get to that upside...but if they do they will be remembered as one of the all time great teams. The mountain to climb is steep and a lot of times the oad players won't be able to scale it sucessfully by the end of the season...but it has been done...and can be done again. If they do manage to put it together effectively, then I feel that they had more of an upside and will be able to get it done in the end over the well oiled machine of experience.

Let's get it all started with a "Calimari is a cheating squid and you UK inbreds are going down in flames.!

After that maybe we could hear some other views. White Mamba? Jonvi? And Trolly, I always value your opinion...so maybe you could chime in.

 

[TangoBlue]

Also I'm getting very tired of the one and done. By the time I learn their names, they're gone.

But I do like seeing a bunch of great talent morphing into a badass team by the end of the year. It's a pleasure to watch them play. Hopefully that team will show up against the dirty birds of Louisville this coming weekend.

 

[rmilia1]

I think it all depends Tango. IMO you have less variance with the 3-4 year experienced teams when it comes to their season potential. Since you mentioned my team ( Iowa ) Ill say that while we may not have the upside of a team like a UK when it comes to sheer talent I think I have a wayyy better handle on what to expect from my team this year. Id be shocked if Iowa didnt make at LEAST the Sweet 16. Now do we have the horses to win a NC?? Im not sure. Id say if the stars align then maybe. On the flipside I could easily see UK winning it all this year IF they come together BUT I could also see them failing to make the tourney at all. I think the better plan for each program is solely dependent on what the expectations for that program are. UK is expected to compete for national titles so you guys dont really have the ability to recruit 3-4 year guys and wait for them to gel, become cohesive and be rewarded with a title in year 3 because the coach will likely be gone before that happens. A program like Iowa doesnt have those expectations so they can afford to take the long term approach. Neither is better than the other IMO, just depends on how willing you are too be risky.

 

[TangoBlue]

I think it all depends Tango. IMO you have less variance with the 3-4 year experienced teams when it comes to their season potential. Since you mentioned my team ( Iowa ) Ill say that while we may not have the upside of a team like a UK when it comes to sheer talent I think I have a wayyy better handle on what to expect from my team this year. Id be shocked if Iowa didnt make at LEAST the Sweet 16. Now do we have the horses to win a NC?? Im not sure. Id say if the stars align then maybe. On the flipside I could easily see UK winning it all this year IF they come together BUT

 I could also see them failing to make the tourney at all.

I think the better plan for each program is solely dependent on what the expectations for that program are. UK is expected to compete for national titles so you guys dont really have the ability to recruit 3-4 year guys and wait for them to gel, become cohesive and be rewarded with a title in year 3 because the coach will likely be gone before that happens. A program like Iowa doesnt have those expectations so they can afford to take the long term approach. Neither is better than the other IMO, just depends on how willing you are too be risky.

Yeah, I think Iowa has a good shot at the sweet sixteen. It's nice to see teams just keep working, playing hard, and along with the recruitment of a few key players, start winning a bunch of games. I realize there is a lot more parity than there used to be...and different teams seem to make some yearly runs at the championship...but most don't seem able to sustain the high quality of play; simply because of big budgets allocated by the perennial top contenders for the championship.

I could also see them failing to make the tourney at all.

I've seen enough of this year's team that I think we'll be in. Unfortunately we don't have many chances left for a victory over a highly ranked team. The key to success for UK is getting Andrew Harrison shaped up as a point guard. He needs to get it up the floor a lot faster...be evaluating the floor before or while getting across the centerline...and start getting the ball in and out...or around the perimeter rapidly This makes the defense work harder and helps break them down. Moving the ball faster will also stop a lot of the double or even triple teaming of Randle. The down time at Christmas and a lot of work over the holiday should make UK a more effective team at least in some of these weaknesses.

By the way...good post on your part.{ } Coming from the CBS forum myself it's nice to see posters from other teams choose to have a reasonable and interesting conversation with UK fans. Most don't either because of idiot UK fans or ........

 

[jonvi]

Which type of team;
1. a team of great talent and little experience such as {for example only} a OAD UK or Mich. Fab Five..............OR

2. a Jr-Senior laden team with lots of experience but maybe not as much top notch talent such as {for example only}an Iowa or an Oregon, would have more upside to their game by the end of the year?


IMO great team play, especially a team with a couple of NBA bound players, will win the big games more often then a team of all OAD's.


The closest OAD team to win it all was UK just a couple of years ago. But they had a couple of upper classmen that had experienced the grind and the hype and knew how to pass knowledge down that allowed those OAD's to work as a team.

I think everyone will agree that this UK team has the potential to be great. But will they is the million dollar question. For me there are too many pitfalls that will keep a team of all OAD's from winning it all.

So I like option 2 the best...but I think that team also needs an NBA ready stud to make the big shot. Along with the junior/senior who understands the big picture and when to and when not to dish it to the stud.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

As a Texas fan, if they aren't a similar talent to Kevin Durant I don't care if we ever sign another one and done player again. Completely destroyed our program. When Rick Barnes recruited guys who stayed with an occasional top tier player who might not stay we were better than we had ever been in my lifetime. Then he started that Canada pipeline of one and done players and it just killed us. Hell, even guys like LaMarcus Aldridge didn't really do much at Texas because he only stayed one year. I think Kansas has a nice system of mixing the two types of players. They might not have the peaks of a program like Kentucky who brings in a boatload every single year, but they are consistently one of the top teams in the nation. I would prefer that personally. The peaks and valleys of Kentucky would drive me crazy as a fan.

 

[TangoBlue]

The peaks and valleys of Kentucky would drive me crazy as a fan.

At first this didn't bother me since UK had went thru 10 years of slow decay ....from top 10 recruits to top 200 recruits. So it was exciting as a UK fan to see Top 10 players signing in groups to play for UK. Then Cal won it all in 2012 and that was icing on the cake.

Reality set in, in 2013...and the fun was gone. That's when I realized that I really didn't identify with the oad players. Realistically I knew they would leave after one year...but since UK won their first championship since 1998, I thought I was happy. Not to be though ......

So I am gradually shifting over to your guys opinions...about having 1-2 chiefs and 3-4 Indians on the team {what UK had years ago}.

Now if Cal could only get those pesky 9-12 nattys in the next 4 years...he could retire with the blessings of all UK fans and we could go back to the 3-4 and done type of players. heh heh!

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Ehh Blue Blood program problems. I don't even know what it is like to see a national title at Texas in basketball. Only reason I said the current state of your program would drive me crazy is because you sign like half the top 10 prospects every year it seems. If they would just stay 2 years you would probably be in the final four like every single year.

 

[dcZONAfan]

i think Self has the system down, like somebody else said. I also very much like what Sean Miller is building in Tucson. AG is our first OAD (hard to count Gerrett from last year since that was an awful decision by the people in his camp) but he is unlike the OAD from Kentucky in that he clearly cares a lot more about the TEAM than his own personal stats. I cannot say the same from what I have seen out of the Kentucky frosh, and I think that is a big difference right there. Not all OAD players have to be me-first guys, and if you find the right ones then they can be the missing link in helping a veteran team go far. Hopefully that's what we are seeing at UA this year.

 

[TangoBlue]

I also very much like what Sean Miller is building in Tucson

Miller was my choice for coach at UK up until UK went after and got Calipari. You've got a great coach at AZ

unlike the OAD from Kentucky in that he clearly cares a lot more about the TEAM than his own personal stats. I cannot say the same from what I have seen out of the Kentucky frosh

I think you need to go back and look at the UK 2012 NC team. The two highest drafted players {Davis and Gilchrist}scored less, shot less, and had a very high number of assists....this is not selfish playing. This is team play.

Not being a smartass...just saying don't always accept the negative publicity that UK, their one and done players {and Coach Cal} get. SOME of that negative publicity is actually NOT True surprisingly.

However...as most other fans "know" for a fact.....all UK fans are idiots and inbred horses asses!

 

[dcZONAfan]

Miller was my choice for coach at UK up until UK went after and got Calipari. You've got a great coach at AZ



I think you need to go back and look at the UK 2012 NC team. The two highest drafted players {Davis and Gilchrist}scored less, shot less, and had a very high number of assists....this is not selfish playing. This is team play.

Not being a smartass...just saying don't always accept the negative publicity that UK, their one and done players {and Coach Cal} get. SOME of that negative publicity is actually NOT True surprisingly.

However...as most other fans "know" for a fact.....all UK fans are idiots and inbred horses asses!

i hear you man, and that '12 kentucky team was one of my favorites to watch because of the unselfish play. I should have been more clear in that I was only referring to this year's team.